With no fanfare or comment, English Canada lost the last full time theatre critic writing for any media, when J. Kelly Nestruck left that beat at the Globe and Mail.

At the end of 2024, J. Kelly Nestruck went from being the Theatre Critic of the Globe and Mail to being the TV Critic for the paper.

It was done quietly, almost without anyone noticing. J. Kelly Nestruck did write an exit essay about his time in the job, but that was all.

With that move English Canada became a theatre producing entity without any bone fide, full time Theatre Critic reviewing theatre in the whole country.

There are several full time theatre critics in Quebec (French Canada) because they have a robust French-speaking theatre scene and a media that values and covers it seriously.  

Theatre in English Canada is also robust, with several debuts of plays in Toronto alone and audiences ready and eager to see them.

The English media, such as it is, hasn’t helped solve the problem of lack of theatre reviewers.

CBC Radio had weekly theatre reviews on both “Metro Morning” and “Here and Now.” I did weekly theatre reviews for “Here and Now” from 2001 to 2011. Then the CBC cancelled all reviews except for film because ‘the demographic changed.’ Perhaps the ‘media’ thinks theatre is too ‘niche.’ It isn’t. Theatre is burgeoning. It requires proper theatre criticism to do justice to the artform.

Since 2011 I have been doing theatre reviews, interviews and commentary on theatre for Critics Circle on CIUT.fm 89.5. I also published my own monthly theatre newsletter, The Slotkin Letter, of reviews of plays I attended in Toronto, environs and on my travels to New York, London and elsewhere. It was available in hard copy to paying subscribers, both professionals and ‘civilians’ that were interested and serious about the theatre. I made it available for free when I put the newsletter online, often posting reviews daily.

We have four daily newspapers that all had full time theatre critics-five if we count the defunct NOW Magazine. Slowly the newspapers got rid of their theatre critics citing their analytics of who was reading reviews or not, regardless of the need to actually cover the artform.  John Coulbourn at the Toronto Sun reviewed theatre and ballet. When he retired the paper did not replace him. The Toronto Sun does not cover the arts at all, except film.

Robert Cushman was a freelance theatre critic for the National Post until they said it was too expensive to pay for his long reviews, no matter that he was an internationally respected theatre critic.

At the Toronto Star, Richard Ouzounian was the last full time Theatre Critic when he retired in 2015. When he left, the paper advertised for a theatre critic but at the last minute divided the job into two freelance positions. That meant the Toronto Star didn’t have to pay them full salaries or benefits and there was a limit to how many theatre reviews the Toronto Star would publish weekly.

Over time, various freelancers wrote reviews and interviews etc. for the paper to fill the reviewing void.  Finally, the Toronto Star advertised for a full time Arts Reporter (not a Theatre Critic) who would review theatre productions and report on stories.  The Toronto Star hired Joshua Chong whose byline lists him as Arts Critic and Reporter. I’m glad the word ‘critic’ has been added to the ‘byline’.

The Globe and Mail also advertised for a Theatre Reporter (not a Theatre Critic) (when J. Kelly Nestruck moved to TV reviewing), to review productions and report stories. Aisling Murphy was hired as the Theatre Reporter. She has been a freelance reviewer for a few years.

Even though theatre productions in Toronto are plentiful,  at both The Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail, the job of Theatre Critic and its importance has been demoted.   It will be interesting seeing how often either paper publishes reviews daily/weekly.  

It’s a worry: the worthy, bone fide critic has disappeared without fanfare, comment or notice.  The decimated media has diminished its coverage of theatre and with it a strong sense that they actually care about thoughtful, vigorous critiquing of the artform.

Bloggers of varying degrees of expertise and knowledge in theatre seem to be trying to fill the gap.

Online workshops professing to teach how to be a theatre critic in a few weeks have popped up. One site indicated that a strong education in Theatre was not really necessary. Really?

Funny, I think my four-year Honours BA in History, Theatre and Criticism of Theatre from York University gave me a good background in the artform.

I recall reading a definition of ‘critic’ from one of these online sites as if you see a play and have an opinion on what you saw, you’re a theatre critic. (Uh, I don’t think so). And ‘graduates’ of such endeavors all consider themselves ‘critics’. It’s more like “wannabees.”

I worry about the folks who want to dabble in reviewing, with little rigor, theatre knowledge or background. Where is the notion of needing to do the work  over the long haul  before one can consider themselves proficient? And without jobs out there where will these folks post? There are a few online sites that post a few of these reviews. Where are the rest of them? Where are their blogs?

We get the theatre we deserve with such little attention and commitment.

I find these superficial pearl-clutching reviews of what they saw and how they felt to be eyeball-rolling in their naivety.

There is diligent citing of the playwright’s and director’s notes telling their intention without any rigor in analyzing if the intention was realized or worth the effort in the ‘review.’

There is a lot of confession on how they were drawn into the production instead of looking at it from a distance for an objective observation, the reasoned effort toward an objective evaluation using evidence and good reason.

Often in these superficial ‘reviews’ every performance is described as ‘awesome’ or ‘brilliant’ without variation. With no analysis of the actual work in the ‘review’, such unvarying gush is tiresome and not useful.

Where is the rigor? Where is the repeated toil and practice of seeing theatre and writing about it? Where is even a basic knowledge of what a review actually is; how it’s constructed; who it’s for; and why it’s so important to the artform?

Audiences want to know if the show was worth their time/money/and attendance. And they want to be informed on a deeper level about the production, the play and the artists who created it.

Absent is any rigor, background, history, knowledge of the artform or reason for doing it? This world of the ‘instant’ bloggers and ‘critics’ who seem to want something magic that makes them a critic without the work, is eyebrow-knitting.

“Critic” is wishful thinking. “Reviewer” is a closer definition. “Scribbler” might be more accurate.

I learned long ago that one supports oneself elsewhere to write the reviews, because there is little money in it. But I didn’t go into theatre criticism for the money. I went into it to share my love of the artform of theatre and to get people to read my work and then decide to see the show themselves.

Theatre is an artform that has lasted for millennia because the stories reflect the world we live in, in all its complexity and depth. The artform has stood up to scrutiny and developed over time because of that rigor and evaluation of solid theatre criticism. If that rigor succumbs to opinion that lacks good reason, analysis or serious evidence, and is rooted in ignorance and fashion, then we will get the mediocre theatre we deserve. There is no place for mediocrity in an artform. We  need bone fide reviewers/critics who do the work and know the difference between the two terms.

Comments on my blog regarding reviews reveal a startling revelation: folks don’t actually know what a review is, who it’s for, the intention, or the formation.

I will try and clarify this and more in the next post, soon.

I think it’s fitting that this post comes after World Theatre Day.

Onward.

{ 7 comments }

Live and in person at the Factory Studio Theatre, Toronto, Ont. A PRESSGANG Production in Association with Factory Theatre. Playing until March 30, 2025.

www.factorytheatre.ca

Written and directed by Graham Isador

Lighting consultant, Trevor Schwellnus

Sound and composition by Ron Kelly

Cast: Craig Lauzon

Ellie Moon

Tim Walker

Playwright Graham Isador knows how to read the future. He began writing his play Truck ten years ago, envisioning a world with driverless trucks. (Perhaps this was before Elon Musk thought of a similar idea, and obviously before he thought of how to keep the bumpers on).

The truckdrivers of the Edison Trucking Company are on strike. They want better pay and longer sick leave. While there seems to be a joint effort of the strikers, the head of the strike is Nathan Dalton (Tim Walker giving a take control performance). Nathan Dalton’s striking colleague is Alan Moxley, played by Craig Lauzon giving a fine performance as a fretful, insecure man who just wants to work and take care of his fractured family—he’s separated from his wife and daughter.  The Edison Trucking Company is not budging in its efforts to stiff the workers. The company is represented by Jamie Baker, played by Ellie Moon, giving a bristling performance of a woman who is as devoid of moral character as she is of concern for anything other than the corporate bottom line.

Playwright Graham Isador has created a production that is spare in props/set pieces, and rich in sound (kudos to Ron Kelly for the sound design and composition) and plot twists. Graham Isador keeps the audience guessing where the twist will lead to next. At the center is Alan Moxley who just wants to do the right thing. Alan is being ‘played’ from various sides. He knows it. He is coerced into giving a compromising speech. He struggles to deal with it. We are led to believe he has found his own way to resolve the situation but that is not entirely clear in the end. The speech becomes something else entirely different.  The text could do with a bit of tweaking to strengthen the final result. Graham Isador has written a play he began ten years ago that envisioned a future that is frighteningly our present.

A PRESSGANG Production in Association with Factory Theatre present:

Playing until March 30, 2025.

Running time: 60 minutes (no intermission)

www.factorytheatre.ca

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at Theatre Orangeville, Orangeville, Ont. Playing until March 30, 2025.

www.theatreorangeville.ca

Written by Mark Crawford

Directed by Stewart Arnott

Set by William Chesney

Costumes by Alex Amini

Lighting by Wendy Lundgren

Sound by Tim Lindsay

Cast: Warren Macaulay

Adrian Shepherd-Gawinski

A rollicking comedy with a serious heart about two gay men deciding to run a bed and breakfast business in a small town, that has its ups and downs but more ups when you least expect it. Beautifully acted by the two creative actors and wonderfully directed.

Brett and Drew are life partners living in Toronto. Brett has a television show about decorating. Drew is in the hospitality business. They have been trying to buy a condo and are always outbid. Then Brett’s Aunt Maggie passes away in her small Ontario town and so the couple go to her funeral. Brett spent his summers with Maggie in her big house. The couple are staying there to attend the funeral. Then Brett learns that Aunt Maggie left him the house. Initially, neither man wants to live in this small town so they plan to sell the house. But that house has a hold on Brett. He loved it and that it reminded him of his beloved Aunt Maggie. Then things change and Brett and Drew decide they will renovate the place and open a bed and breakfast in the small town. They fret about how two gay men will be accepted. Then they realize they aren’t alone.

Playwright Mark Crawford has a gift for writing funny plays about quirky characters. Some of his other works are: Stag and Doe, The New Canadian Curling Club and Chase the Ace.  Mark Crawford has created another gently funny play in Bed and Breakfast about quirky characters in odd situations, doing the best they can. Brett and Drew are curious, gracious, accommodating and surprised by their neighbours and so are we as the two find more and more support.

The play is not without its darker moments. Drew was ostracized by his family when he came out to them. Closer to home, Brett and Drew find a homophobic slur painted on their house. Both men are stunned and shaken. Again, Mark Crawford writes about a serious subject enveloped in humour.  He covers every conceivable idea and attitude about gayness: cliches, stereotypes, the need to hide, the confidence after coming out, allyship when you least expect it all with blazing humour. The banter is smart, funny, barbed at times and even silly at others.  But the sobering message is clear.

The production, directed by Stewart Arnott, is exquisite. William Chesney’s simple set of the outline of the house says all that needs to be said about its size, hominess and welcomeness.  

Both Adrian Shepherd-Gawinski and Warren Macaulay play multiple characters besides Brett and Drew respectively. Brett and Drew bolster each other. Both Drew and Brett were efficient, problem solvers and confident. Both had a sense of humour but Brett seemed the more buoyant.

Both Adrian Shepherd-Gawinski and Warren Macaulay also played other characters, segueing with elegance and quickness from one to another. Kudos again to director Stewart Arnott who seemed more a choreographer here than ‘just’ a director. With what seemed like a ‘pirouette’ Adrian Shepherd-Gawinski switched from being the cheerful Brett, to being a cigarette-smoking irreverent woman serving lattes, to a gangly lisping young man who loved to bake and bring treats to Brett and Drew, and on and on. Warren Macaulay not only played Drew but also a macho builder, and the oddest looking person you could imagine as a guest, who seemed to move sideways and manipulated his head sideways as well.  Together both actors created seamless characters, each distinct with idiosyncrasies both physical and personality-wise.

The combination of the gifted cast and their inventive director brought Mark Crawford’s touching play to life, illuminating all its shining glory. Bravo.

Comment. It was heartening listening to the people of a certain age around me during intermission, talking about family members or friends who were gay, spoken about with affection, humour and matter of fact kindness. Art imitates life in a small town.

Theatre Orangeville Presents:

Plays until March 30, 2025.

Running time: 2 hours approx. (1 intermission)

www.theatreorangeville.ca

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at the Barrie by the Bay Commercial Complex, Barrie, Ont. Playing until March 29, 2025.

www.tift.ca

Written by David Harrower

Directed by Dean Deffett

Costumes designed by Sequoia Erickson

Sound design by Nolan Moberly

Set and prop co-ordination Lauren Cully

Cast: Lucy Janisse

Cyrus Lane

Kirstyn Russelle

A gripping, explosive production of an unsettling play that is about love and obsession. Beautifully acted by the cast. Director Dean Deffett is one to watch. He’s a sensitive, bold director.

The Story. Blackbird by David Harrower is about an affair that ended badly. Una and Peter had an affair fifteen years before. It was passionate, consensual and lasted about three months before Peter broke it off. Now 15 years later Una tracks him down to find out why it ended. Una is now 27 and Peter is now 55. That is correct. At the time of the affair, Una was 12 and Peter was 40.

It’s very easy to think the play is about pedophilia. Playwright David Harrower never makes things easy in this play. It’s so nuanced. He calls the play a “love story.” I don’t doubt him.

Society sure thought it was pedophilia and sent Peter to prison. He served his time; changed his name to Ray—the text lists him as Ray and Una now refers to him as Ray; got a job and went about his life. Una was also in a prison of her own. She remained in her small town with her parents and endured strange looks from people. All her relationships failed. She loved only one person and that was the man she knew as Peter. She saw his photo in a magazine as part of a team in a business and tracked him down.

The Production and comment. It’s explosive. As with many Talk Is Free Theatre productions, Blackbird is played in a site-specific place in an office complex in Barrie. There is a ‘mountain’ of garbage to the side of the small space where the audience sits, that offers atmosphere for the production. The acting space is a small, garbage-strewn lunch-room of some industrial building.  It’s filthy. Garbage overflows the garbage can.

When the play begins in darkness, we hear a door open and some kind of forceful activity. Ray (Cyrus Lane) is on one side of the room, tense, frightened, anxious, and Una (Kirstyn Russelle) is on the other side, combative, challenging. He is in a suit and tie with cell phone on his belt. She is in a fall coat underneath is a sleeveless summer dress and heels. Sequoia Erickson has designed the clothes and deserves kudos. As the production progresses, it appears there is s slit up the middle of the dress that offers some alure to the ‘look.’

Una is now a confident woman who has single-mindedly come looking for Ray to not only find out what happened when he left her without explanation, but also to continue (one imagines) the relationship, this time as a young, mature woman.

He is mortified to see her. They dredge up the past. They met at a family BBQ. Una’s father invited Ray—he was a neighbour. He went but didn’t know anyone. Una was there and was scowling and unhappy. So he went up to talk to her. She liked him and pursued him. He thought of her often after that. The relationship went from there, meeting, being obsessed with the other, discovering love, having consensual sex until he ended it, sort of with a little help from being arrested and sent to trial.

Ray seems to have some custodial job there although he is reluctant to admit it. He is skittish about being in the presence of this woman. As Ray, Cyrus Lane is a mixture of being timid, desperate at being found and forcing himself to be in control. Ray has tried valiantly to hide his former ‘self’ and here he is being discovered.  As Una, Kirstyn Russelle is compelling. It seems she is almost toying with Ray. She has all this pent-up rage that has been seething for 15 years. She also plays up Una’s womanly wiles. She knows how to play a man—in this case Ray—and put him on the defensive. But this isn’t about a calculating woman. It’s about a person who was abandoned and never knew why; who had to endure being ostracized with no place to hide.

Director Dean Deffett has maneuvered his cast around the small space with dexterity, sensitivity and keen imagination.  He has initially staged Ray as far away from Una as possible. She sinks into a corner. He has a table between them and he doesn’t want to get close.  They circle each other but keep their distance until later in the play when their emotions erupt. I love the immediacy, urgency, passion and danger of this production. And the tenderness and love—that is clear. Director Dean Deffett, illuminates the vulnerability of both characters. Both Ray and Una are fragile, damaged, confident and yearning for the other. He has a gifted cast, but this young man’s creative brain is impressive. Dean Deffett—remember his name. I’ll certainly be looking out for his productions.

The play and production leave us with a lot to chew over and think hard about.

Talk Is Free Theatre Presents:

Plays until March 29, 2025.

Running time: 90 minutes.

www.tift.ca

{ 2 comments }

Live and in person at VideoCabaret, the Deanne Taylor Theatre, 10 Busy St. Toronto, Ont. Plays until March 30, 2025.

https://videocabaret.yapsody.com/event/index/838871/SMART

Created and performed by Nicky Guadagni

Drawing from Smart’s writing, Rosemary Sullivan’s (“By Heart”) Biography of Elizabeth Smart and Carolyn Smart’s (“Ardent”) poetic portrait of Smart.

Directed and dramaturged by Sandra Balcovske

Music and sound by Greg Morrison

Lighting by Andrew Dollar

Canadian poet/novelist, Elizabeth Smart (1913-1986) lived a life that was emotionally huge, fraught with incident, passionate and fiercely unconventional.

She was born into privilege in Ottawa, Ontario. She began writing poetry when she was 10 years old. As soon as she could she left Ottawa for England to get away from the restrictive privilege. She discovered the poems of George Barker and fell in love with them and him (even before she actually met him). She was single-minded about meeting him and when she did she and he began a torrid affair. They had four children together. Never mind that he was already married and never left his wife.  Matters got messy. She wrote of the relationship in “By Grand Central Station I Sat Down and Wept,” which was described as “One of the most passionate accounts of romantic love in modern English literature.”

In one short hour Nicky Guadagni beautifully reveals what has been described as “A compelling personal exploration of the romantic legend, passionate mother and transcendent Canadian writer Elizabeth Smart.”

Guadagni created the script drawing on “By Heart” Rosemary Sullivan’s biography of Elizabeth Smart and “Ardent” Carolyn Smart’s poetic portrait of Elizabeth Smart. The writing is spare, smart and vivid. At one point Elizabeth Smart is described as “Twenty-three and terrified of missing her life.” Elizabeth Smart’s world is wrapped up in that simple sentence.

The lights go up on Nicky Guadagni sitting on a white wicker-backed bench. She is dressed in what looks like a white nightgown and loose socks.  The look is quirky and careless. When you are that gifted a writer as Elizabeth Smart was, you don’t care about such frivolous  things as ‘appearance.’

I first saw Smart performed in Barrie, Ont. in 2020, when Talk Is Free Theatre presented a series of plays in private backyards, because of COVID. There Nicky Guadagni’s performance was expansive as she puttered in the backyard gardens. For this iteration, in the intimate Deanne Taylor Theatre of VideoCabaret, Nicki Guadagni is more self-contained, although director Sandra Balcovske maneuvers Guadagni around the space to some extent. Nicki Guadagni’s performance has grown since I last saw the production. It’s vivid, compelling and absolutely captures the passion and drive of Elizabeth Smart whether talking about her children, her writing or George Barker.  

Guadagni’s delivery as Smart is quiet (but perhaps gentle microphoning would be a help to hear when her voice drops low).

Guadagni offers a characterization of Elizabeth Smart, so full of conviction and loyalty to Barker (even when he didn’t return it in the same way), that we are not quick to be judgmental. It’s a performance full of nuance, sensitivity, detail and passion. It’s a life obsessed with the love of Barker, her children and the compelling need to write and Guadagni reveals it all masterfully. Most important, she makes us want to find out more.

VideoCabaret presents:

Plays until March 30, 2025.

Running time: 60 minutes (no intermission)

https://videocabaret.yapsody.com/event/index/838871/SMART

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at the CAA Theatre, Toronto, Ont. Mirvish Productions present the Harmony House production. Playing until March 30, 2025.

www.mirvish.com

Created by Mike Ross and Sarah Wilson

Music director and arranger, Mike Ross

Set by Lorenzo Savoini

Lighting by Simon Rossiter

Sound by Sergey Varlamov

Cast: Brielle Ansems

Greg Gale

Mike Ross

Alicia Toner

Kirk White

Creator/performer Mike Ross is a treasure. His production of INSIDE AMERICAN PIE is a gift to the audience.

Mike Ross is a musician, composer, arranger, producer and archaeologist. Along with Sarah Wilson they have created Inside American Pie, a deep dive into the mysteries and meanings of the song “American Pie” by Don McLean. Mike Ross calls the resulting presentation, a ‘docu-concert’. Mike Ross has been doing this kind of musical ‘archaeological’ work for his whole creative life. When he was the music supervisor at Soulpepper, for example,  he conceived of the idea of the Golden Record, that examined a record and its contents that was sent into space on the Voyager Spaceship. That docu-concert was astonishing. Mike Ross has continued this work with Inside American Pie.

Background. In 2020, Mike Ross and his wife Nicole Bellamy and their two children went home, to Prince Edward Island. They had been living in Toronto for years (he was working at Soulpepper) and they decided they would go home. It was the pandemic. For pure folly they bought a small music hall of 140 seats called Harmony House, in Hunter River. There they presented concerts. Inside American Pie was the first effort and it sold out over the three years it has been presented there. The Mirvishes found out about it and booked it for a winter stint in Toronto—Harmony House takes a break during the winter, so the timing for Toronto was perfect.

While Mike Ross is a great collaborator with his creative colleagues, one senses he is the driving force behind these docu-concerts.

In Inside American Pie Mike Ross and his co-creator Sarah Wilson delve into the eye-popping complexity of Don McLean’s song “American Pie” that references ‘the day the music died’, ‘good-old boys were drinking whiskey ‘n rye’, ‘drove my Chevy to the levee but the levee was dry….’ to try and discover what it all means.

Mike Ross has created the show about Don McLean’s iconic song, by referencing other singers and their works and how the works are connected. Ross talks about the musicians and music of the time and what was going on in the United States and the world. He has created the world from where “American Pie” came.

In the digging Mike Ross and Sarah Wilson start with Don McLean as a kid delivering newspapers, when he reads that Buddy Holly (a huge musical influence in the late 1950s) died in a plane crash Feb. 3, 1959. He was 22. With him on the plane were The Big Bopper (Jiles Perry Richardson) and Ritchie Valens who also died. For Don McLean this was ‘the day the music died.’

Inside American Pie lists 13 songs, such as “Come on, Let’s Go” by Ritchie Valens, “Every Day” by Buddy Holly, and American Pie, the last song on the list.

Mike Ross and his terrific band of Prince Edward Island singers and musicians dress casual and play and sing with flair. The back drop seems innocuous at first—an arrangement of faded stars and stripes—and then you realize you’re looking at an American flag. It’s to the credit of this show and it’s gifted ‘cast’ that we are not overwhelmed by it because of what is going on with our neighbour to the south.

Mike Ross starts the concert with a wink and a smile. He begins to sing “American Pie” even though it’s listed as the last song. When he comes to the chorus, he looks out to the audience with a look that suggests it’s our cue to start singing, which we do. After a bit he says we are getting ahead of ourselves and he will come back to the song later.

Mike Ross is an engaging, enthusiastic narrator. He parses through the various aspects of the song, stanza by stanza, explaining what phrases mean or refer to. He notes sections that stumped him. “Good old boys are drinking whiskey n rye” makes no sense because they are really the same kind of drink. But then he offers, what if the line meant “Good old boys are drinking whiskey in Rye” meaning they were drinking in the town of Rye in upstate New York, where one of the ‘good old boys’ lived.  It’s stuff like this that makes Inside American Pie such a rich, provocative, entertaining time in the theatre. Mike Ross has also created startling, compelling arrangements of every one of the 13 songs.

With every reference in the song Mike Ross found a connection to what was going on the world at the time; or how it influenced other singers. Works of some of the other singers referenced are sung during the concert. And after Mike Ross ‘excavated’ the gems of information from each of Don McLean’s stanzas, Mike Ross and his wonderful band sang the whole song. And again, all it took was one look from Mike Ross to the audience to get them singing again, with gusto. Wonderful.

Mirvish  Productions Presents the Harmony House Production.

Plays until March 30, 2025.

Running time: 90 minutes (no intermission)

www.mirvish.com

{ 4 comments }

Call for Submissions

The Canadian Jewish Playwriting Competition recognizes the most outstanding, unproduced, Canadian plays with a Jewish focus.  

Originally a program run by an independent group of dedicated volunteers, The Toronto Jewish Theatre Committee, the Canadian Jewish Playwriting Competition was founded in 1989 and operated out of the Bathurst JCC in North Toronto. 

In 1999, the MNjcc adopted this program and ran it with a group of jurors from the professional theatre community. Before 2006 there was an average of six plays submitted each year. With more publicity and exposure, up to 40 plays are submitted from six Canadian provinces, the United States and Israel each contest year. The competition is now a bi-annual program.

The winning playwright will receive $1,000 (CDN) and an 8-hour CAEA workshop with a director and up to six actors. This workshop concludes with a public reading. Generously supported by the Asper Foundation. 

The 2025 competition is co-presented by Bema Productions (British Columbia), The Winnipeg Jewish Theatre (Manitoba), The Harold Green Jewish Theatre Company (Ontario), and The Segal Centre for the Performing Arts (Quebec). 

The submission deadline is May 25, 2025. Guidelines and submission form can be found here

www.mnjcc.org/theatre

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at the Tarragon Extra Space, Toronto, Ont. Produced by Red Snow Collective. Playing until March 23, 2025.

www.tarragontheatre.com

Playwright, Diana Tso

Director/choreographer, William Yong

Composer Alice Ping Yee Ho

Lighting designed by Andre du Toit

Scenic and costume designer, Ting-Huan, Christine Urquhart

Cast: Shiong-En Chan

Tai Wei Foo

Brenda Kamino

Honey Pham

Michelle Wang

With Carried By The River playwright Diana Tso has written a play honouring absent mothers, myths, memories, cultural traditions and finding the truth about one’s identity.

Kai is a young Asian woman raised in Canada. She is grieving her late mother as she goes through her papers. Kai is startled to realize that she was adopted from China, when there was the “One-Child Policy” in China, when a family in China could only have one child. If they had more, then the child had to be put up for adoption or other drastic options. Kai felt she had to go to China to find her routes. Kai is ‘guided’ by the spirit of her late mother. She is also ‘visited’ by mythic animals that carry their own wisdom in guiding her: a deer, a tiger, a bear. The metaphor of the river as another guide is a thread through this poetic play.

When Kai lands in China she meets a friendly, chatty street vendor named Ting Ting who very quickly suggests they go into business together. The two young women bond and as they traded information about themselves, Kai reveals she is gay. Ting Ting is horrified because to reveal one is gay in China is dangerous—being gay is not accepted. Ting Ting proves a good friend and  Kai is invited to meet Ting Ting’s family. We also learn that Ting Ting’s mother had to put a child up for adoption years ago, because of the “One-Child Policy.”

It seemed to me, and I’m sure I’m not alone, that Kai would naturally pursue this bit of information by trying to see if her adoption from China might have something to do with Ting Ting’s mother having to give up a child for adoption, but playwright, Diana Tso does not pursue that, which I found odd. It’s clear later in the play, why this was not questioned, but I feel another pass around this issue is needed to stop the audience from thinking there was something wrong with not pursuing it earlier.  While the play is very poetic, I think it would be stronger with judicious editing to make the work flow easier.

William Yong is both the director and the choreographer. He certainly has a vivid imagistic sense. The production is stunning, with swaths of material as a backdrop and stunning costumes for the animals (kudos to Ting-Huan and Christine Urquhart), but often I sensed that William Yong’s concept and images for the production overpowered the play. At the beginning there is a tableau of three people in silhouette who do a dance. We have no idea what this signifies since the play has not started. This might tend to confuse the audience. Not a good thing to start.  We do get a sense what it means at the end when we can put that dance in context. The dance would work better if placed at the end, as a kind of closure, rather than at the beginning as confusion.

At the beginning Kai is talking to her iPad as if writing a letter to her mother. She sits stage right. Willam Yong has a video of Kai reading from her iPad projected on one of the stage left panels of material. Why? It seems fussy and unnecessary. William Yong has also created a lot of dance sequences, all lovely and vivid. It’s just that I found the dance interrupted the flow of the play unfolding.

The acting is well intentioned and committed, with Honey Pham as Kai and Brenda Kamino as Lao Lao, a no-nonsense presence, doing strong work. But too often I found the other actors too hesitant and insecure. The pace was too slow.

Carried by the River is an honourable attempt to pay homage to memory, lost mothers and our true identities. It would be stronger with another pass of writing and more directorial diligence  to the play rather than the concept.

Red Snow Collective presents:

Plays until March 23, 2025.

Running time: 95 minutes (no intermission)

{ 0 comments }

Live and in person at the Factory Studio Theatre, Toronto, Ont. Playing until March 16, 2025.

www.factorytheatre.ca

Written and performed by Kelly Clipperton

Directed by Naomi Campbell

Designed by Naomi Campbell and Kelly Clipperon

Musical direction and piano, Janet Whiteway

Lighting design by Christian Horoszczak

Choreography by Shane MacKinnon

Live sound design by Robin Easton

Set renderings by Ariel Clipperton

Band: Janet Whiteway

Tak Arikushi-Guitar

Oriana Barbato-Bass

Carrie Chestnutt-Sax and flute

Karl Anderson-drums

Don’t let the title fool you. Kelly Clipperton knows plenty about living in the world; coping with its bullies; finding his true self and celebrating it in irreverent humourand song; and bursting with the capacity to love and care especially for his father as he lived with dementia.

I can’t remember the last time the Factory Studio stage looked so stylish or the place so packed. Naomi Campbell and Kelly Clipperton have created a shiny set of the stage at the top and a runway flowing into the audience. Some audience sit at tables on either side of the runway.

Kelly Clipperton enters in a spotlight singing, dressed in a khaki army hat, khaki army shirt and a khaki skirt down to the group. Clipperton looks like a cross between a soldier and an Andrews Sister.

His style is cheeky, suggestive and full of double entendres. When you least expect it he talks about his father, who was a professional football player, later a geography high school teacher, and Kelly Clipperton’s constant champion.

Let’s Assume I Know Nothing and Move Forward From There tells the ‘typical’ story of a young boy who is gay, trying to fit in, being invisible, but being physically bullied on his way home from school. But of course, there is nothing typical about a kid being bullied because he is different. Each story is particular, individual, and just makes one suck air at the difficulty of a kid just trying to get through the day. Kelly Clipperton tells his story with humour and honesty. There is his cigarette-smoking grandmother who doesn’t seem sympathetic. There is the pack of bullies, unnamed but present as he tries to cross the bridge to get home, but having to endure the taunts and punched to do it—it always seems to be a pack of bullies that prey on one defenseless kid.

Kelly Clipperton grows up, thrives and succeeds working in a hair salon for black customer (Clipperton is not Black), then a model and then onward. At every job, he excelled. Nothing held him back. He sings about it in a strong baritone. He performs in a carefree, confident manner. But it’s his father who holds his heart. He references his father throughout the show as a person always on his mind—Clipperton took care of him during his father’s dementia. There is such tenderness in his recollections.

I saw this late in the short run. It closes today. It’s well worth a visit.

Performed at the Factory Studio Theatre

Plays until March 16, 2025.

Running time: 90 minutes (no intermission).

www.factorytheatre.ca   

{ 0 comments }